Microsoft Flight Simulator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Microsoft Flight Simulator
Hello
I apologise in advance if this is the wrong place to post this (admins: please move it if need be) but I would like some advice.
Microsoft Flight Simulator:
1. I intend to purchase a new computer but am unsure as to what specifications (I do NOT want to break the bank!) would be good enough to run Microsoft Flight Simulator smoothly.
2. Recommended joystick/yolk/rudder pedals? Price? (Would like something relatively high standard because I will be training to fly to a Commercial standard later this year.
3. Which Flight Simulator? 'FX' perhaps?
I honestly have no idea how to go about this. I seriously don't want to make the mistake of purchasing a god-awful yolk/joystick/rudder pedals combination...
Thank you for your time
I apologise in advance if this is the wrong place to post this (admins: please move it if need be) but I would like some advice.
Microsoft Flight Simulator:
1. I intend to purchase a new computer but am unsure as to what specifications (I do NOT want to break the bank!) would be good enough to run Microsoft Flight Simulator smoothly.
2. Recommended joystick/yolk/rudder pedals? Price? (Would like something relatively high standard because I will be training to fly to a Commercial standard later this year.
3. Which Flight Simulator? 'FX' perhaps?
I honestly have no idea how to go about this. I seriously don't want to make the mistake of purchasing a god-awful yolk/joystick/rudder pedals combination...
Thank you for your time
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. I intend to purchase a new computer but am unsure as to what specifications (I do NOT want to break the bank!) would be good enough to run Microsoft Flight Simulator smoothly.
FS 2004 is slightly cheaper than FSX, and there are more third-party add-ons available for it (which is important if you want to get maximum realism out of the simulator). FSX has more eye candy built in (if you have the computer horsepower for it), and the internal structure is more amenable to the use of complex add-ons, although the add-on market still hasn't ramped up to the level of FS 2004 add-ons. Both use the same flight dynamics, which are largely table-based … meaning that realism is fairly good for real-world-based aircraft in normal flight, but simulation of unusual flight regimes is much more variable.
2. Recommended joystick/yolk/rudder pedals? Price? (Would like something relatively high standard because I will be training to fly to a Commercial standard later this year.
3. Which Flight Simulator? 'FX' perhaps?
You'll definitely want to look into add-on aircraft, which are often so superior to the built-in aircraft in MSFS that it's like flying a whole new simulator. The big names are PMDG, Level-D, Eaglesoft, Dreamfleet, Carenado, Willco, etc. Some companies specialize in airliners (PMDG and Level-D are legendary for these), and others specialize in smaller aircraft (Dreamfleet has fabulous Beechcraft add-ons, and Carenado is known for its Cessna add-ons). Some are in between … Eaglesoft has a great Citation X, for example.
Other things you'll want to consider are membership in VATSIM or IVAO, so that you can use voice communications with ATC on these free virtual flying networks (some of the controllers on these networks are also controllers in real life, ditto for pilots). They work with MSFS thanks to a free plug-in. Add-on scenery is nice for major airports. Add-on weather packages such as Active Sky produce weather so realistic that it's hard to distinguish the simulator sky from a real sky. And many add-on bizjets and airliners include a FMS for which you may need regular database updates (about $20 a year). RealityXP produces gauges of such superlative realism that you can operate them using the real-world manuals (in the case of Garmin gear, the simulator code is actually written by Garmin).
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Surrey Hills
Posts: 1,478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You could nave a look at X-Plane?
X-Plane
Welcome to the New Home of the X-Plane Flightsim Community
Has quite a following amongst pilots. You can design and fly your own machines.
Not expensive either. PC/Mac/Linux $ 29 US
A kind Canadian genius - Jacques Brault made this X-Plane SkyArrow based on my machine.
Generic X-Plane scenery
Alternative VFR Photo scenery
Original item resting at Perth.
X-Plane
Welcome to the New Home of the X-Plane Flightsim Community
Has quite a following amongst pilots. You can design and fly your own machines.
Not expensive either. PC/Mac/Linux $ 29 US
A kind Canadian genius - Jacques Brault made this X-Plane SkyArrow based on my machine.
Generic X-Plane scenery
Alternative VFR Photo scenery
Original item resting at Perth.
Last edited by aviate1138; 28th Jan 2011 at 08:15. Reason: added images
More bang for your buck
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: land of the clanger
Age: 82
Posts: 3,512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hardware wise, fastest processor + lots of ram + dual top spec graphics cards and a large hard drive should do. Try googling "gaming computers" for some off the shelf stuff.
A good idea would be to get yourself over to one of the many flight sim sites and have a trawl for advice there.
I recommend Avsim, flightsim.com or flightsim world.
My personal fave is FS9 probably because I have way too many add ons to go to anything else.
Good luck with your search.
I recommend Avsim, flightsim.com or flightsim world.
My personal fave is FS9 probably because I have way too many add ons to go to anything else.
Good luck with your search.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Aberdeen, UK
Posts: 526
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are pros and cons to each sim but on the hardware side, the Saitek Yoke is good but has a *very* strong center detente which is unrealistic and you might find it annoying.
The CH Flight Yoke (not the new one with the silly buttons on the front), is good as are their rudder pedals. Saitek sell the throttle quadrant (bundled with their yoke) separately and it's worth a purchase to use with a yoke (you can buy a couple and clip them together for a cheap multi-engine throttle quadrant). (The throttle quadrant bundled with the saitek yoke connects via a DIN plug rather than USB which the individual one does which is more flexible).
You *need* a TrackIR - honestly, once you've used one, you'll never go back.
PC spec wise, if you're going FSX, you'd be looking at nothing less than an Intel i5 (one of the new ones if possible) or i7, with a decent graphics card such as an ATI 58** series or Nvidia equivalent. Likely cost about £700-800 for a reasonable rig.
If you're going multi-monitor, ATI has the advantage with their eyefinity cards which will support 3 monitors for widescreen gaming. Nvidia and other cards would need a Matrox TripleHead2Go which are limited in choices of resolution and monitor.
FSX pros are that most new add-ons are for FSX, and the FS user base is now 75% on FSX and 25% still on FS9.
FS9 (Flight Sim 2004) will run much better than FSX on a comparable machine - it's a matter of preference which you prefer, and if you want to run some of the newer add-on scenery/wx and aircraft.
X-Plane is a bit of a mixed bag. It has FS9 frame rates and runs quite well, but the included aircraft are shockingly bad and the add-on market is small in comparison with Microsoft. FSX is where it's at if you want heavy metal or complex procedural aircraft.
However, there are some amazing aircraft around for X-Plane such as the Carenado Mooney which knock the spots of the FS equivalent. Also you get sloping/non-level runways in X-Plane.
X-Plane needs a bit of tweaking and has a steeper learning curve than FS9/X, but once properly configured can perform better in certain regards, but it is limited in other regards.
If you want a decent fidelity set-up, then FSX is the way to go with REX2 as a scenery/weather add-on, or ActiveSky X for weather.
Microsoft have a new simulator in the works called "Flight" but it'll be a few months before more details come out on that.
From the JustFlight forums, this is a reasonable build for getting decent FSX performance:
• £98 Asus P8H67-M EVO Intel H67 Express Socket 1155 Motherboard
• £184 Intel i5 2500K Retail
• £75 Corsair Memory XMS3 8GB DDR3 1333 Mhz (2x4GB)
• £197 EVGA GeForce GTX 470 Superclocked NVIDIA Graphics Card
• £50 Western Digital Caviar Black 640GB WD6401AALS Hard Drive
• £75 Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit OEM
• £80 Corsair Gaming Series GS700 PSU
• £23 Asus TM-B11 Black Micro ATX Tower Case
• £13 Samsung DVD Writer, SH-S223C/BEBE, SATA, Black, OEM
Total: £795
That should give you an idea.
To be honest, get a decent spec machine, then just go get all 3 sims and see which one you prefer. You'll get FSX Deluxe/Gold for £30, FS2004 for less and X-Plane for around the same. Try them all out and see which one suits you the best.
(Also check out Lock On:Flaming Cliffs 2 and DCS:Black Shark for the best combat flight sim, and awesome helicopter sim if you're into that side of it!).
Cheers,
S.
The CH Flight Yoke (not the new one with the silly buttons on the front), is good as are their rudder pedals. Saitek sell the throttle quadrant (bundled with their yoke) separately and it's worth a purchase to use with a yoke (you can buy a couple and clip them together for a cheap multi-engine throttle quadrant). (The throttle quadrant bundled with the saitek yoke connects via a DIN plug rather than USB which the individual one does which is more flexible).
You *need* a TrackIR - honestly, once you've used one, you'll never go back.
PC spec wise, if you're going FSX, you'd be looking at nothing less than an Intel i5 (one of the new ones if possible) or i7, with a decent graphics card such as an ATI 58** series or Nvidia equivalent. Likely cost about £700-800 for a reasonable rig.
If you're going multi-monitor, ATI has the advantage with their eyefinity cards which will support 3 monitors for widescreen gaming. Nvidia and other cards would need a Matrox TripleHead2Go which are limited in choices of resolution and monitor.
FSX pros are that most new add-ons are for FSX, and the FS user base is now 75% on FSX and 25% still on FS9.
FS9 (Flight Sim 2004) will run much better than FSX on a comparable machine - it's a matter of preference which you prefer, and if you want to run some of the newer add-on scenery/wx and aircraft.
X-Plane is a bit of a mixed bag. It has FS9 frame rates and runs quite well, but the included aircraft are shockingly bad and the add-on market is small in comparison with Microsoft. FSX is where it's at if you want heavy metal or complex procedural aircraft.
However, there are some amazing aircraft around for X-Plane such as the Carenado Mooney which knock the spots of the FS equivalent. Also you get sloping/non-level runways in X-Plane.
X-Plane needs a bit of tweaking and has a steeper learning curve than FS9/X, but once properly configured can perform better in certain regards, but it is limited in other regards.
If you want a decent fidelity set-up, then FSX is the way to go with REX2 as a scenery/weather add-on, or ActiveSky X for weather.
Microsoft have a new simulator in the works called "Flight" but it'll be a few months before more details come out on that.
From the JustFlight forums, this is a reasonable build for getting decent FSX performance:
• £98 Asus P8H67-M EVO Intel H67 Express Socket 1155 Motherboard
• £184 Intel i5 2500K Retail
• £75 Corsair Memory XMS3 8GB DDR3 1333 Mhz (2x4GB)
• £197 EVGA GeForce GTX 470 Superclocked NVIDIA Graphics Card
• £50 Western Digital Caviar Black 640GB WD6401AALS Hard Drive
• £75 Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit OEM
• £80 Corsair Gaming Series GS700 PSU
• £23 Asus TM-B11 Black Micro ATX Tower Case
• £13 Samsung DVD Writer, SH-S223C/BEBE, SATA, Black, OEM
Total: £795
That should give you an idea.
To be honest, get a decent spec machine, then just go get all 3 sims and see which one you prefer. You'll get FSX Deluxe/Gold for £30, FS2004 for less and X-Plane for around the same. Try them all out and see which one suits you the best.
(Also check out Lock On:Flaming Cliffs 2 and DCS:Black Shark for the best combat flight sim, and awesome helicopter sim if you're into that side of it!).
Cheers,
S.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I understand, X-Plane attempts to dynamically calculate the behavior of an aircraft in flight, whereas Flight Simulator depends more on tables of data for each aircraft. The result is that Flight Simulator works well for normal flight regimes and real-world aircraft, whereas X-Plane works well for unusual flight regimes and experimental or hypothetical aircraft.
And from what I understand, high-level simulators designed to simulate specific real-world aircraft (such as airliners) are mostly table-driven, because the behavior of the simulator must match the real aircraft, and it's easier to do this by looking up the required behavior in a table of test data obtained from the real aircraft than it is to try to simulate it by applying laws of physics and aerodynamics. The table-driven result tends to be more faithful to the real thing. The drawback is that the sim isn't very good at simulating things for which there is no test data. This would explain recent concerns about high-level simulators not being able to correctly simulate unusual situations, such as spins or inverted flight or engines falling off the wing or whatever. Since there's no test data for these scenarios, the sim has to guess, and it doesn't always guess right.
This in turn means that if you like to simulate sedate, normal flight in aircraft that exist in the real world, MSFS is a good choice. But if you like to experiment with your own aircraft (or any aircraft for which no body of test data exists), or if you like aerobatics or other unusual flight regimes, you might be better off with X-Plane.
Also, I can't agree that you need a fancy video card. With most games these days, a fast video card makes a huge difference in frame rates and performance, but not with Flight Simulator. Flight Simulator depends heavily on the CPU for graphics performance, in part because sometimes it has to calculate each pixel individually. It can't benefit from splashing a texture on polygons for the most part, although it does that a little bit when it can. Polygon performance in a GPU doesn't help for pixel-sized details on the horizon, though.
When I've upgraded video cards, sometimes most games speed up by an order of magnitude, but I hardly see any change in Flight Simulator at all. A faster CPU, on the other hand, will have a noticeable effect on MSFS.
Hmm ... also, XP is a better platform for MSFS than Windows 7. And 32-bit is preferable, since MSFS is a 32-bit app.
And from what I understand, high-level simulators designed to simulate specific real-world aircraft (such as airliners) are mostly table-driven, because the behavior of the simulator must match the real aircraft, and it's easier to do this by looking up the required behavior in a table of test data obtained from the real aircraft than it is to try to simulate it by applying laws of physics and aerodynamics. The table-driven result tends to be more faithful to the real thing. The drawback is that the sim isn't very good at simulating things for which there is no test data. This would explain recent concerns about high-level simulators not being able to correctly simulate unusual situations, such as spins or inverted flight or engines falling off the wing or whatever. Since there's no test data for these scenarios, the sim has to guess, and it doesn't always guess right.
This in turn means that if you like to simulate sedate, normal flight in aircraft that exist in the real world, MSFS is a good choice. But if you like to experiment with your own aircraft (or any aircraft for which no body of test data exists), or if you like aerobatics or other unusual flight regimes, you might be better off with X-Plane.
Also, I can't agree that you need a fancy video card. With most games these days, a fast video card makes a huge difference in frame rates and performance, but not with Flight Simulator. Flight Simulator depends heavily on the CPU for graphics performance, in part because sometimes it has to calculate each pixel individually. It can't benefit from splashing a texture on polygons for the most part, although it does that a little bit when it can. Polygon performance in a GPU doesn't help for pixel-sized details on the horizon, though.
When I've upgraded video cards, sometimes most games speed up by an order of magnitude, but I hardly see any change in Flight Simulator at all. A faster CPU, on the other hand, will have a noticeable effect on MSFS.
Hmm ... also, XP is a better platform for MSFS than Windows 7. And 32-bit is preferable, since MSFS is a 32-bit app.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: manchester
Age: 70
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Davidflies
welcome to PPrune.
A great deal of advice offered I agree with, some not. I can only offer my experience from what I have done so far.
You may note my age so you can see I am no youth. Nor am I a wannabe, my involvement with aircraft has been as a fitter on Nimrods after my RAF apprenticeship at RAF Halton and came to sims several years ago when the plan was to go for PPL. Medical problems put an end to that, hopefully not for ever.
My computer is a E6300 dual core with X1950 graphics which runs FSX ok and gives passable frame rates so do not consider anything more to be required. This can be picked up at very small price these days.
I remember advice from years ago when PCs were not ubiquitous which was - first decide what you want or NEED to do, choose the package then get computer to run it. This still holds true.
In software, you have quite a choice and it may depend on how far you have progressed so far - if you have not been in cockpit yet take a trial lesson or so before committing anything. If beyond that go for FSX to do basic instrument stuff, no experience of others.
If you are further progressed ie doing PPL, you need to think more of hardware and getting something more than a joystick. So far I have only used my cyborg eveo joystick so bow to the experience of others. I would consider rudder pedals essential (Saitek seem value) and anything else superfluous but saitek's quadrant could be useful to configure as trim control.
After PPL you may be thinking of twins so quadrant(s) needed and yoke.
from then on hopefully you will have no time for sim and too busy flying.
To others who may be reading this with a look down their nose to simmers, some of us do it as no longer able to pursue our dream due to other factors, in my case medical. I would not dare dispute any matter of flying with you but will not be told to keep my opinions on other matters such as airline industrial industrial relations to myself as I am a 'mere' simmer. Possibly one final piece of advice to Davidflies, do not turn into such a conceited as a bar steward such as that.
A great deal of advice offered I agree with, some not. I can only offer my experience from what I have done so far.
You may note my age so you can see I am no youth. Nor am I a wannabe, my involvement with aircraft has been as a fitter on Nimrods after my RAF apprenticeship at RAF Halton and came to sims several years ago when the plan was to go for PPL. Medical problems put an end to that, hopefully not for ever.
My computer is a E6300 dual core with X1950 graphics which runs FSX ok and gives passable frame rates so do not consider anything more to be required. This can be picked up at very small price these days.
I remember advice from years ago when PCs were not ubiquitous which was - first decide what you want or NEED to do, choose the package then get computer to run it. This still holds true.
In software, you have quite a choice and it may depend on how far you have progressed so far - if you have not been in cockpit yet take a trial lesson or so before committing anything. If beyond that go for FSX to do basic instrument stuff, no experience of others.
If you are further progressed ie doing PPL, you need to think more of hardware and getting something more than a joystick. So far I have only used my cyborg eveo joystick so bow to the experience of others. I would consider rudder pedals essential (Saitek seem value) and anything else superfluous but saitek's quadrant could be useful to configure as trim control.
After PPL you may be thinking of twins so quadrant(s) needed and yoke.
from then on hopefully you will have no time for sim and too busy flying.
To others who may be reading this with a look down their nose to simmers, some of us do it as no longer able to pursue our dream due to other factors, in my case medical. I would not dare dispute any matter of flying with you but will not be told to keep my opinions on other matters such as airline industrial industrial relations to myself as I am a 'mere' simmer. Possibly one final piece of advice to Davidflies, do not turn into such a conceited as a bar steward such as that.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you for all your replies, everyone. Considerable invaluable advice given!
@al446, thank you for your reply (and for the "welcome"). Sounds like you have a great wealth of experience within the aviation sector! I am very sorry to read that your PPL ambition had to come to an end - great shame indeed. I would never turn into such a bar-steward (fortunately!). I respect all opinions - simmer or aviator. Always welcome. I thought you would be interested to know I am currently training for my Private Pilots Licence at Halton Aeroplane Club, RAF Halton (airfield)...and have seen some of the 'apprentices' surface at the airfield quite a few times! Admirable. Small world!
Thank you once again. Wishing you all the very best.
David
@al446, thank you for your reply (and for the "welcome"). Sounds like you have a great wealth of experience within the aviation sector! I am very sorry to read that your PPL ambition had to come to an end - great shame indeed. I would never turn into such a bar-steward (fortunately!). I respect all opinions - simmer or aviator. Always welcome. I thought you would be interested to know I am currently training for my Private Pilots Licence at Halton Aeroplane Club, RAF Halton (airfield)...and have seen some of the 'apprentices' surface at the airfield quite a few times! Admirable. Small world!
Thank you once again. Wishing you all the very best.
David
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: manchester
Age: 70
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for reply David, small world indeed.
I'm glad you have embarked on PPL you lucky person. Halton will have changed quite a bit since my time there but remember going up in chipmunk from there. Happy days. Also older apprentices, I was 15 when I went in, government decided nobody could commit to the length required at that age so killed the app programme. I was thankful but others mourned it.
Anyway, good luck in your flying life.
Before you commit any cash you may like to search for 'flightgear', a free sim. I have it but not as accessible as others, if you can make it work for you, well done.
Any queries PM me.
I'm glad you have embarked on PPL you lucky person. Halton will have changed quite a bit since my time there but remember going up in chipmunk from there. Happy days. Also older apprentices, I was 15 when I went in, government decided nobody could commit to the length required at that age so killed the app programme. I was thankful but others mourned it.
Anyway, good luck in your flying life.
Before you commit any cash you may like to search for 'flightgear', a free sim. I have it but not as accessible as others, if you can make it work for you, well done.
Any queries PM me.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that if you came back to Halton (airfield), you'd be VERY surprised! Cast-iron hangers are still dominating the landscape there (rusty rusty!) and there are Chipmunks a-plenty! The well-known aviation artist Michael Turner hangers his Chipmunk there - beautiful machine! Quite often see him polishing it outside one of the hangers. I would just LOVE to have the opportunity to go up in a Chipmunk someday. They're expensive though! Very thirsty on oil apparently, albeit I am not very technical so am probably wrong!
Thank you for the "good luck". I'll need it! My background is retail and having taken my first 'trial lesson' at the end of 2009 - half way through my third (and final) year of my degree in Retail Management, I really enjoyed it. In all honesty, I'm keeping a very open mind given the exceptionally turbulent aviation industry, however, I will still give it my best shot with regards to achieving a Commercial Pilots Licence hopefully within the next 18 months!
Thank you for your advice regarding simulators. Like finding the 'right' flight school, knowing which simulator to get is a bit of a puzzle! Not 100% certain that investing approx £800-£1000 on a 'decent' new computer (including flight controls) is what I should do, or whether I should just save the money for the 'journey' ahead of me, but I failed my Oxford Aviation 'CRJ-200' Simulator test a few days ago (I went to Oxford Aviation Academy for a 'Skills Assessment') because I was so horrendous at controlling the aircraft! Took me by surprise in all honesty and made me question whether I should at least get used to flying through simulators a bit more because it would enable me to practice my 'scan' technique! Obviously, I appreciate that a computer-based simulator is nothing like the real thing. Just looking to weigh up some options
Thank you once again.
Kind regards
David
Thank you for the "good luck". I'll need it! My background is retail and having taken my first 'trial lesson' at the end of 2009 - half way through my third (and final) year of my degree in Retail Management, I really enjoyed it. In all honesty, I'm keeping a very open mind given the exceptionally turbulent aviation industry, however, I will still give it my best shot with regards to achieving a Commercial Pilots Licence hopefully within the next 18 months!
Thank you for your advice regarding simulators. Like finding the 'right' flight school, knowing which simulator to get is a bit of a puzzle! Not 100% certain that investing approx £800-£1000 on a 'decent' new computer (including flight controls) is what I should do, or whether I should just save the money for the 'journey' ahead of me, but I failed my Oxford Aviation 'CRJ-200' Simulator test a few days ago (I went to Oxford Aviation Academy for a 'Skills Assessment') because I was so horrendous at controlling the aircraft! Took me by surprise in all honesty and made me question whether I should at least get used to flying through simulators a bit more because it would enable me to practice my 'scan' technique! Obviously, I appreciate that a computer-based simulator is nothing like the real thing. Just looking to weigh up some options
Thank you once again.
Kind regards
David
Psychophysiological entity
Starting from a level playing field, and assuming from scratch, if a pilot has not flown FS, and he's up against one that has, he will be at a disadvantage. A substantial one.
I tried to find my post on going to LBA for a check-ride, but couldn't. It was about not having flown for many, many years. Because of not knowing FS very well, I was lazy about setting new winds. I hung around a simulated LBA for quite a few hours with 30kts at 2,000 across the ILS. When I got there, that's exactly what I'd got!
PB took me around the circuit a few times and on one arrival at the NDB he said, "you're freaking me out! You're arriving at the beacon within 2 seconds every time." What's more, I was chatting merrily away about this and that while I did it. FS had virtually (ho ho) removed the workload.
I tried to find my post on going to LBA for a check-ride, but couldn't. It was about not having flown for many, many years. Because of not knowing FS very well, I was lazy about setting new winds. I hung around a simulated LBA for quite a few hours with 30kts at 2,000 across the ILS. When I got there, that's exactly what I'd got!
PB took me around the circuit a few times and on one arrival at the NDB he said, "you're freaking me out! You're arriving at the beacon within 2 seconds every time." What's more, I was chatting merrily away about this and that while I did it. FS had virtually (ho ho) removed the workload.
